The Murder of Liaquat Ali-Khan

سید اکبر پاکستانی شہری نہیں، بلکہ افغان تھا۔ 1944ء میں برطانوی حکومت کی ایماء پر افغانستان میں سیاسی گڑبڑ کی ناکام کوشش کے بعد اس کا خاندان صوبہ سرحد میں آباد ہوگیا تھا۔ اسے اور اس کے بھائی مزدک خان کو برطانوی حکومت سے وظیفہ ملتا تھا، جو پاکستان بننے کے بعد بھی جاری رہا۔ کیا سید اکبر حکومت پاکستان کا تنخواہ دار خفیہ کارندہ تھا؟ اس نے پنڈی کے ہوٹل میں اپنا پیشہ سی آئی ڈی پنشنر لکھوایا تھا۔ صوبہ سرحد میں ایسے خفیہ معاملات کے ضمن میں سکندر مرزا کا بہت شہرہ تھا جو قبائلی علاقوں میں پولیٹکل ایجنٹ رہنے کے علاوہ پشاور کے ڈپٹی کمشنر بھی رہے تھے اور قیام پاکستان کے بعد سیکریٹری دفاع کے طاقتور عہدے تک پہنچ چکے تھے۔

Jinnah - Liaquat Relations.

Moral and Financial Dishonesty are not that dangerous as dangerous the Intellectual dishonesty is. The good thing in American System, which should be appreciated is that, they declassify their State’s Privileged documents {Please visit the US Declassified Documents on Pakistan in the links below} after certain years and these declassified files help a great deal to those who want to learn from history. Since the society of ours is consist upon bunch of Intellectual Dishonest what we do instead of telling the truth to the nation we change and tamper with the history and if that is not enough we altogether change the text books of Social Studies or Pakistan Studies with the change of every government. Examples are as under:

Late. Ms. Fatima Jinnah in her memoir ‘My Brother’, which she prepared with the help of Mr. G. Allana is still not fully published some excerpt of which as per the mood of our Establishment and the nation as well are very sensitive. However, the same are being quoted below:

“QUOTE”

“Towards the end of July, without prior notice, Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan, the Prime Minister, arrived in Ziarat accompanied by Chaudary Mohammad Ali. He asked Dr. Ilahi Bux about his diagnosis of Quaid’s health. The doctor said that as he had been invited by me to attend to the Quaid, he could only say what he thought of his patient to me.

“But, as Prime Minister, I am anxious to know about it. The doctor politely replied. “Yes, Sir, but I can’t do it without the patient’s permission”.

As soon as I was sitting with the Quaid, that the Prime Minister and the Secretary General wanted to see him, I informed him. He smiled and said, “Fati, do you know why he has come?” I said I wouldn’t be able to guess the reason. He said, “He wants to know how serious my sickness is. How long I will last”. After a few minutes he said, Go down. Tell me. Tell me Prime Minister I will see him”.

“Its late, Jin. Let them see you tomorrow morning”.

“No, let him come now. Let him see for himself”.

The two were together for about half an hour, and as soon as Liaquat Ali Khan came down, I went upstairs to my brother. I found him absolutely tired, and he wore a sickly look. He asked me to give him some fruit juice, and then said, “Send Mr. Mohammad Ali”. The Secretary General of the Cabinet was with him for about fifteen minutes, and when he was once again alone, I went into his room. I asked him if he would have juice or coffee, but his mind was too preoccupied to answer me. By now it was dinnertime, and he said, “You better go down. Have dinner with them”.

“No”, I said emphatically, “I would rather be with you, and have dinner upstairs”.

“No, that is not correct. They are our guests here. Go. Eat with them”.

I found the Prime Minister on the dinner table in a jolly mood, cracking jokes and laughing, while I shivered with fright about his health, who was alone in his sick bed. Chaudary Mohammad Ali was silent, thinking. Before the dinner was over, I rushed upstairs. He smiled at me as I entered and said, “Fati, you must be brave”. I did my best to conceal tears that came surging into my eyes.

After a few days, Mr. Ghulam Mohammad, who was Finance Minister at that time, came to see the Quaid-e-Azam. As I sat alone with him over lunch, he said, “Miss Jinnah, I must tell you some thing Quaid-e-Azam’s Independence Day message has been played down, while the Prime Minister’s message was printed on the posters and pasted on buildings all over the cities. It was also thrown from aeroplanes over big cities”. I listened to this quietly: what was the use of bothering about such things? The only thing that mattered to me was my brother’s health, not his publicity.

“UN-QUOTE” [PAGE 438-439 from Shahabnama by Late. Qudratullah Shahab.]

Second opinion: Who killed Miss Fatima Jinnah? Khaled Ahmed’s Urdu Press Review Daily Times Friday, September 17, 2004

Many political leaders of Pakistan died unnatural deaths. But it is shocking that many natural deaths too are being converted today into unnatural death through hindsight. If this thing goes on it might put the entire official history of Pakistan out of joint

In Pakistan, there are far too many mysterious deaths among the elite. If you think Liaquat Ali Khan was the first leader murdered by an assassin in 1951, you are wrong. Many people think that the Quaid-e-Azam, the founder of the state, was murdered too, by none other than the administration of Liaquat Ali Khan! Then Bhutto was hanged by General Zia who was himself killed by someone who shot down his plane. There are many who think that ex-premier Suhrawardi was killed in Beirut. And General Ayub was killed by an American photographer who was hiding a lethal device in his camera!

According to “Nawa-e-Waqt” (22 July 2003) former attorney general of Pakistan and “honorary” secretary of the Quaid-e-Azam from 1941 to 1944, Mr Sharifuddin Pirzada, revealed outside a conference-room in Islamabad that Miss Fatima Jinnah had not died a natural death in 1967 but was murdered by a servant of hers. Mr Pirzada did not speak about the incident in the conference “for fear of spoiling the atmosphere” but added that more revelations would be made by him on August 14 about who hushed up the murder and then asked the Karachi police to bury the case. The revelation has not failed to shock the entire nation busy observing a year dedicated to the memory of Fatima Jinnah, the Quaid-e-Azam’s most revered sister. She led the opposition to General Ayub Khan’s military regime and figured as his most powerful electoral opponent in elections which were widely believed to have been rigged. Ms Jinnah returned late at night from a wedding. She locked up the house and threw the keys in her kitchen as was her habit and went to sleep. In the morning when Ms Jinnah could not be awakened, her neighbour Begum Hidayatullah was called, who got the door opened in the presence of commissioner Karachi and the inspector general of police, but found that Ms Jinnah had been murdered. Her bed was covered with blood and her neck was scarred. The police later declared that the death had been caused by cardiac arrest. Ms Jinnah’s lawyer nephew Akbar Pirbhai flew over from Bombay to investigate the real cause of her death but was confronted with an official smokescreen. Mr Pirzada thinks that she was killed by a servant of the house, but that the cover-up was later managed by the Ayub government.

Mr Sharifuddin Pirzada had appeared in a case that opened at the Sindh High Court in 1970 contesting Fatima Jinnah’s claim that the Quaid was a Shia. Miss Jinnah had entered an affidavit in 1948 at the High Court saying that she and Mr Jinnah were Shia. On 29 October 1970, one Hussain Ali Gangji Walji filed a suit at the High Court against Shirin Bai contesting her claim that Fatima Jinnah was a Shia. He sought to prove that Miss Fatima Jinnah was in fact a Sunni, as was Jinnah, and that therefore Shirin Bai was entitled to only half the inheritance under Sunni law, the other half going to the agnate relations, that is, to the offspring of Fatima Jinnah’s paternal uncle. Hussain Ali was the son of Gangji Walji who was in turn the son of Walji Poonja, the paternal uncle of Jinnah and Fatima Jinnah. The chief witness to appear for Hussain Ali Gangji Walji contesting Shirin Bai’s claim in 1970 was Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada. He had been honorary secretary to Jinnah from 1941 to 1944. He deposed that Jinnah was avowedly non-sectarian and had kept away from Shia politics. Had Miss Jinnah been alive she should would have been offended with him. He referred to documents which confirmed the secular Muslim faith of the Quaid. It appears that Matloobul Hassan Syed and Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada were for some time simultaneously secretaries to the Quaid, one ‘honorary’ and the other ‘private’. When Pirzada supported General Ayub Khan and declared his connection with Jinnah, Miss Fatima Jinnah issued a statement contradicting that he was ever his secretary. Pirzada submitted a press clipping at the Court which said that ‘Mr Pirzada, the husband of a Bohra lady, had become secretary to the Quaid’.

According to “Khabrain” (22 July 2003) Saira Hashmi’s book published some years ago had revealed that Fatima Jinnah went to attend the wedding of the daughter of Mir Laiq Ali on 8 July 1967 and returned from there after a short stay. She locked up the house and took her usual glass of milk. In the morning Lady Hidayatullah was called who got the house opened and discovered Miss Fatima Jinnah dead. One window was open which was unusual and the glass of milk was not there. Her cook had been fired three days earlier and a new cook had been hired. The new cook disappeared and was not to be found after the incident. After she was given two separate “namaz janaza” Miss Jinnah was not allowed to be buried near the Quaid by the Karachi administration which wanted her to be buried in Karachi’s Amir cemetery, but under public pressure commissioner Karachi allowed a piece of land 120 feet away from the Quaid’s mausoleum for her grave. That’s where she was finally laid to rest. Ahmad Saeed Kirmani who was Ayub Khan’s information minister said that he had heard rumours that Ayub Khan had got her killed but when he asked Ayub he said he would be mad to do a thing like that. Diplomat and a friend of the Jinnah family Qutbuddin Aziz told “Jang” (23 July 2003) that his mother had given “ghusl” to Miss Fatima Jinnah and had noticed no wounds or spots of blood. He said Ms Jinnah had died a natural death. Justice (Retd) Javed Iqbal told “Nawa-e-Waqt” that Mr Pirzada had kept quiet for 36 years and for some strange reason had now chosen to speak to distract attention. Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan told daily “Pakistan” that he knew that Miss Fatima Jinnah had been murdered but that the IG had covered it up. “Jang” (24 July 2003) quoted one Jawad Beg from Karachi saying his mother Mrs Raheel Sherwani was one of the ladies who gave the last “ghusl” to Miss Fatima Jinnah and had found no blood or scars on her body. Nawabzada Nasrullah remarked that ex-foreign secretary Mian Sheheryar Khan, whose late mother was a friend of the Jinnah family, would know the truth about Fatima Jinnah’s death.

Nawabzada Nasrullah definitely thinks that Miss Jinnah was killed by someone. He is also convinced that ex-prime minister Suhrawardi too was murdered. The mystery has developed because Miss Jinnah’s radio address after the death of the Quaid was switched off, meaning that all was not well between her and Liaquat Ali Khan. Then she had a tough confrontation with General Ayub whose son Gohar Ayub took out a violent procession against her in 1964 during elections when Karachi was expected to fall to her. It is psychologically damaging to the nation to learn all these details during a year dedicated to her memory. *

2nd example:

“Quote”

In 1945 Liaquat signed an agreement with Bhulabhai Desai of the Congress party, committing the Muslim League to a certain line of action on future constitutional progress of the country. He did this after telling Desai that Jinnah was a sick man and was dying and if the Congress desired a lasting and practicable solution of the Muslim problem it should deal with him (Liaquat) rather than with Jinnah. It was a secret and shady deal and Jinnah was neither consulted nor informed. When he read the news and the text of the Liaquat-Desai Pact in the press he was shocked, and considered it as an act of treachery on Liaquat’s part, and ordered his domestic staff not to let Liaquat enter his residence if he came to visit him.

Even as Prime Minister, Liaquat did not enjoy the trust of Jinnah. How could he with this background? Chaudari Muhammad Ali implied in his talks with me that the two men were not even on speaking term except in public and large company. M.A.H. Ispahani said that the Prime Minister did not take the files to the Governor General for personal discussion but sent them by the hand of his secretary. Thus there is sufficient evidence from authentic quarters to prove that Liaquat Ali Khan, in spite of being the first Prime Minister of the country, was far from being a national hero. His own record in office provides additional support to this contention. He failed to expedite the process of constitution making and died after more than four years in command without giving the country its basic law. He made a deliberate decision to refuse to visit the Soviet Union from which he had received an invitation. Instead, he chose to go to the United States and take Pakistan into the American Camp, thus initiating a slide, which led, by stages to friendship, junior partnership, dependence, obedience, beggary, and servitude.

He groomed certain bureaucrats for high political offices and preferred their advice to the counsel of his political colleagues. He neglected the task of organizing the Pakistan Muslim League and making it into a grass root party. He did nothing to meet the needs or allay the fears of the indigenous population of East Bengal. He posted arrogant, unsympathetic and self-willed Punjabi and Urdu-Speaking civil servants to the Eastern Wing, laying the first brick around the foundation stone of Bangladesh.

WHAT HAPPENED THE DAY WHEN PAKISTAN FIRST PRIME MINISTER WAS KILLED

	کمپنی باغ، راولپنڈی میں کیا ہوا؟   وسط اکتوبر 1951 کی اس شام کمپنی باغ راولپنڈی میں پیش آنے والے واقعات کی روشنی میں لیاقت علی خاں کے قتل کو ایک انفرادی جرم قرار دینا مشکل ہے ۔ وزیر اعظم پر قاتلانہ حملے کے فوراً بعد کمپنی باغ میں ہونے والے واقعات پر ان گنت سوالات اٹھائے جا سکتے ہیں۔ وزیر اعظم کے جلسے میں صوبہ سرحد کے وزیر اعلیٰ اور آئی جی پولیس تو موجود تھے مگر پنجاب کے وزیر اعلیٰ ممتاز دولتانہ، آئی جی پولیس قربان علی خاں اور ڈی آئی جی، سی آئی ڈی انور علی غائب تھے۔ درحقیقت جلسہ گاہ میں فرائضِ منصبی پر مامور پولیس کا اعلی ترین عہدیدار راولپنڈی کا ایس پی نجف خاں تھا۔ پاکستان مسلم لیگ کے سیکرٹری جنرل یوسف خٹک پنڈی میں تھے مگر جلسہ گاہ میں موجود نہیں تھے۔ گولی کی آواز سنتے ہی نجف خاں نے پشتو میں چلا کر کہا، ’اسے مارو‘۔ نجف خاں نے پنڈی (پنجاب) کے جلسے میں پنجابی کی بجائے پشتو کیوں استعمال کی؟ کیا انہیں معلوم تھا کہ قاتل افغانی ہے؟ ان کے حکم پر سید اکبر کو ہلاک کرنے والا انسپکٹر محمد شاہ بھی پشتو بولنے والا تھا۔ کیا پولیس کا ضلعی سربراہ اضطراری حالت میں یاد رکھ سکتا ہے کہ اس کے درجنوں ماتحت تھانیدار کون کون سی زبان بولتے ہیں؟ کیا تجربہ کار پولیس افسر نجف خاں کو معلوم نہیں تھا کہ وزیر اعظم پر حملہ کرنے والے کو زندہ گرفتار کرنا ضروری ہے؟ جب انسپکٹر شاہ محمد نے سید اکبر پر ایک دو نہیں، پانچ گولیاں چلائیں، اس وقت سفید پوش انسپکٹر ابرار احمد نے حاضرینِ جلسہ سے مل کر قاتل سے پستول چھین لیا تھا اور اسے قابو کر رکھا تھا ۔ کیا انسپکٹر شاہ محمد قاتل پر قابو پانے کی بجائے اسے ختم کرنے میں دلچسپی رکھتے تھے؟ لیاقت علی کے صاحبزادے اکبر لیاقت علی کا کہنا ہے کہ سید اکبر کو تو خواہ مخواہ نشانہ بنایا گیا، اصل قاتل کوئی اور تھا۔ وہ یہ بھی کہتے ہیں کہ لیاقت علی خاں کو گولی سامنے سے نہیں، عقب سے ماری گئی تھی۔ جلسہ گاہ میں موجود مسلم لیگ گارڈ بھالوں سے سید اکبر پر ٹوٹ پڑے۔ اس کے جسم پر بھالوں کے درجنوں زخم تھے۔ اس کا مطلب ہے کہ وزیر اعظم کے آس پاس بہت سے مسلح افراد موجود تھے جس سے ناقص حفاظتی انتظامات کی نشاندہی ہوتی ہے۔ نجف خاں کے حکم پر حفاظتی گارڈ نے ہوا میں فائرنگ شروع کر دی جس سے جلسہ گاہ میں افراتفری پھیل گئی اور زخمی وزیراعظم کو طبی امداد پہنچانے میں رکاوٹ پیدا ہوئی۔ اس ہوائی فائرنگ کا مقصد واضح نہیں ہو سکا۔ ایس پی نجف خاں نے انکوائری کمیشن کو بتایا کہ انہوں نے اپنے ماتحتوں کو ہوائی فائرنگ کا حکم نہیں دیا بلکہ ایس پی نے اپنے ماتحتوں سے جواب طلبی کر لی۔ انکوائری کمیشن کے سامنے اس ضمن میں پیش کیا جانے والا حکم 29 اکتوبر کا تھا۔ تاہم عدالت نے رائے دی کہ ریکارڈ میں تحریف کی گئی تھی۔ اصل تاریخ 20 نومبر کو بدل کر 29 اکتوبر بنایا گیا مگر اس کے نیچے اصل تاریخ 20 نومبر صاف دکھائی دیتی تھی۔ ظاہر ہے کہ نجف خاں نے فائرنگ کا حکم دینے کے الزام کی تردید کا فیصلہ 20 نومبر کو کیا۔ سرکاری کاغذات میں ردوبدل ایس پی نجف خاں کے سازش میں ملوث ہونے یا کم از کم پیشہ وارانہ بددیانتی کا پختہ ثبوت تھا۔ انکوائری کمیشن کے مطابق نجف خاں نے ایک ذمہ دار پولیس افسر کے طور پر اپنے فرائض کی ادائیگی میں کوتاہی کی تھی۔ اس عدالتی رائے کی روشنی میں نجف خان کے خلاف محکمانہ کارروائی ہوئی لیکن انہیں باعزت بحال کر دیا گیا۔ وزیر اعظم کے جلسے میں ممکنہ ہنگامی صورت حال کے لیے طبی امداد کا کوئی انتظام نہیں تھا حتٰی کہ کسی زخمی کو ہسپتال لے جانے کے لیے ایمبولنس تک موجود نہیں تھی۔ چاروں طرف اندھا دھند گولیاں چل رہی تھیں اور چند افراد اس بھگڈر میں سید اکبر کو ختم کرنے میں مصروف تھے۔ کچھ لوگ ایک وزنی آرائشی گملا اٹھا لائے اور اسے سید اکبر پر دے مارا جس سے اس کی پسلیاں ٹوٹ گئیں۔ اس افراتفری میں سید اکبر پر حملہ کرنے والوں کا اطمینان حیران کن تھا۔ سید اکبر نے زرد رنگ کی شلوار قمیص پر اچکن پہن رکھی تھی۔ یہ خاکسار تحریک کی وردی نہیں تھی۔ واردات کے فوراً بعد یہ افواہ کیسے پھیلی کہ قاتل خاکسار تھا بلکہ صوبہ بھر میں خاکساروں کی گرفتاریاں بھی شروع ہو گئیں۔ کیا یہ عوام کے اشتعال کو کسی خاص سمت موڑنے کی سوچی سمجھی کوشش تھی؟ خواجہ ناظم الدین نتھیا گلی میں تھے جب کہ غلام محمد پنڈی ہی میں تھے۔ دونوں نے جلسے میں شرکت کی زحمت نہیں کی۔ البتہ وزیر اعظم کے قتل کی خبر پاتے ہی یہ اصحاب صلاح مشورے کے لیے جمع ہو گئے۔ مشتاق گورمانی کی گاڑی جلسہ گاہ میں اس وقت پہنچی جب نیم مردہ وزیراعظم کو جلسہ گاہ سے باہر لایا جا رہا تھا۔ وزیراعظم کی موت کی تصدیق ہوتے ہی گورمانی صاحب ان کے جسد خاکی کو ہسپتال چھوڑ کر اپنے گھر چلے گئے اور اگلے روز کراچی میں تدفین تک منظرِ عام پر نہیں آئے۔ اس سازش کے ڈانڈوں پر غور و فکر کرنے والوں نے تین اہم کرداروں کی راولپنڈی سے بیک وقت دُوری کی طرف اشارہ کیا ہے۔ سیکرٹری دفاع سکندر مرزا کراچی میں ٹینس کھیل رہے تھے۔ فوج کے سربراہ ایوب خان لندن کے ہسپتال میں تھے اور سیکرٹری خارجہ اکرام اللہ ایک خاص مشن پر ہالینڈ میں بیٹھے اگلے احکامات کے منتظر تھے۔

WHO KILLED THE FIRST PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN

سید اکبر کون تھا ؟   سید اکبر پاکستانی شہری نہیں، بلکہ افغان تھا۔ 1944ء میں برطانوی حکومت کی ایماء پر افغانستان میں سیاسی گڑبڑ کی ناکام کوشش کے بعد اس کا خاندان صوبہ سرحد میں آباد ہوگیا تھا۔ اسے اور اس کے بھائی مزدک خان کو برطانوی حکومت سے وظیفہ ملتا تھا، جو پاکستان بننے کے بعد بھی جاری رہا۔ کیا سید اکبر حکومت پاکستان کا تنخواہ دار خفیہ کارندہ تھا؟ اس نے پنڈی کے ہوٹل میں اپنا پیشہ سی آئی ڈی پنشنر لکھوایا تھا۔ صوبہ سرحد میں ایسے خفیہ معاملات کے ضمن میں سکندر مرزا کا بہت شہرہ تھا جو قبائلی علاقوں میں پولیٹکل ایجنٹ رہنے کے علاوہ پشاور کے ڈپٹی کمشنر بھی رہے تھے اور قیام پاکستان کے بعد سیکریٹری دفاع کے طاقتور عہدے تک پہنچ چکے تھے۔ سید اکبر کا ذاتی کردار بیان کرنے کے لیے تین اصطلاحات سے مدد لی جا سکتی ہے۔ یعنی سیاسی مذہبیت، جنسی اضطراب اور ضعیف العقیدہ مذہبی جنون۔ ایسا غیر متوازن شخص کسی سازش میں بہترین آلہ کار ثابت ہو سکتا ہے۔ لیاقت علی خان قتل کے بارے میں سرکاری نقطہ نظر یہی تھا کہ یہ مذہبی دیوانے اور ذہنی مریض سید اکبر کا انفرادی اقدام تھا جس میں کسی سازش کو دخل نہیں تھا۔ روزمرہ زندگی میں سید اکبر مذہبی آدمی تھا۔ پابندی سے نماز پڑھتا اور زکٰوت ادا کرتا تھا۔ اس نے شراب اور جوئے کے خلاف ایک کتاب کی کئی جلدیں خرید کر مفت تقسیم کی تھیں۔ سید اکبر قائد اعظم سے شدید عقیدت رکھتا تھا حالانکہ وہ بھی لیاقت علی خان کی طرح پردے کے قائل نہیں تھے۔ سید اکبر ہر وقت کشمیر میں جہاد اور بھارت پر حملے کے خواب دیکھتا رہتا تھا۔ اس نے اپنے گھر میں الٹے سیدھے جنگی نقشے لٹکا رکھے تھے۔ وہ ایبٹ آباد کے مولویوں سے تقاضا کیا کرتا تھا کہ وہ عوام پر جہاد کی اہمیت واضح کریں۔ 14 اکتوبر کو ایبٹ آباد سے راولپنڈی جاتے ہوئے سید اکبر نے وہی لباس پہن رکھا تھا جو اس نے جہاد میں شریک ہونے کے لیے تیار کرایا تھا۔ اس کے مکان کی تلاشی میں روزنامہ ’تعمیر‘ اور ’نوائے وقت‘ کے متعدد تراشے ملے جن میں بیگم لیاقت علی خان کے خلاف رسوا کن اداریے تحریر تھے۔ ان دونوں اخبارات میں وزیر اعظم اور ان کی بیوی کے خلاف گھٹیا مہم چلائی جا رہی تھی جس میں سید اکبر کو گہری دلچسپی تھی۔ دوسری طرف سید اکبر کے بھائی مرزک کے مطابق سید اکبر خود پردہ ترک کر چکا تھا۔ وہ کبھی کبھی اپنی بیوی اور بیٹے کو سینما دکھانے لے جایا کرتا تھا۔اس نے 16 اپریل 1949ء کو لاہور سے دو گھڑیاں خریدیں، جن میں سے ایک اس کی داشتہ رخ عافیہ کے لیے تھی۔ اس نے اپنے لڑکے دلاور خاں کو ایبٹ آباد میں ماڈرن یورپین سکول میں تعلیم کے لیے داخل کرایا تھا۔ مرنے کے بعد سید اکبر کی جیب سے 2041 روپے برآمد ہوئے۔ 450 روپیہ ماہانہ سرکاری وظیفہ پانے والے قاتل کے گھر سے7650 روپے کے نوٹ اور ’منی لال چمن لال اینڈ کمپنی بمبئی‘ کی تیار کردہ نقلی سونے کی 38 اینٹیں ملیں۔ سید اکبر پر اسرار طور پر کچھ آدمیوں سے ملتا جلتا تھا۔ چودہ اکتوبر کو پنڈی پہنچ کر سید اکبر نے چند سوالات لکھ کر کسی سے استخارے کی درخواست کی تھی۔ قتل سے ایک روز قبل اسے تحریری جواب ملا جس میں اور باتوں کے علاوہ یہ بھی لکھا تھا کہ بہشت میں حوریں تمہاری منتظر ہیں۔ تم ہماری خوشنودی پاؤ گے۔ ایبٹ آباد میں سی آئی ڈی کے اہلکار تین سال سے سید اکبر کی نگرانی کر رہے تھے۔ چودہ اکتوبر کو سی آئی ڈی راولپنڈی کو پیغام ملا کہ سید اکبر کی ’معمولی نگرانی‘ کی جائے۔وزیر اعظم کی آمد کے موقع پر ایسے مشکوک کردار کے بارے میں ان احکامات کا واضح مطلب تھا کہ کچھ لوگ سید اکبر کی پشت پناہی کر رہے تھے۔ انکوئری کمیشن کی رپورٹ کے مطابق ’استخارے کا کاغذ دیکھنے اور واقعات پرکھنے سے معلوم ہوا کہ سید اکبر دانستہ یا نادانستہ طور پر کسی ہوشیار شخص یا گروہ کا آلہ کار بن گیا تھا۔ یہ ماننا مشکل ہے کہ لیاقت علی سید اکبر کے مذہبی جنون کا شکار ہو گئے اور یہ کہ سید اکبر کو خدا نے وزیر اعظم کو قتل کرنے کی ہدایت کی تھی۔‘

The resignation of Pakistan first law minister Jogindar-Nath

“To my utter regret it is to be stated that after partition, particularly after the death of Quaid-i-Azam, the scheduled castes have not received a fair deal in any matter” Resuming the painful narrative of Pakistan’s long journey backwards on which we had set out with the resignation of the newborn country’s first law minister, Joginder Nath Mandal, from the cabinet of Prime Minister Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan on October 8, 1950 (‘The long journey backwards’, Daily Times, May 4, 2011), we find ourselves at a fork — the road more travelled leads ahead to Liaquat’s assassination a year later and so on. Let us not proceed on that yet. There is many a chapter of our collective guilt that must be first revisited on the road less travelled before history in its ruthless fashion confines the nation to the dustbin of oblivion. Most of all, names have to be named now. Let us start with the first villain of the piece called Noorul Amin (literally meaning, the light of the trustworthy, no less). Actually, there is tough competition for the highest place of dishonour in our gallery of rogues. But, one at a time, not necessarily in order of precedence. So, insofar as Liaquat Ali Khan is concerned, he had snatched Jinnah’s Pakistan from the Quaid-i-Azam even before the country appeared on the world map. Over to Mandal, again. Below are some select direct quotes from his resignation letter:

 “My dear Prime Minister,

 “It is with a heavy heart and a sense of utter frustration at the failure of my lifelong mission to uplift the backward Hindu masses of East Bengal that I feel compelled to tender resignation of my membership of your cabinet. It is proper that I should set forth in detail the reasons, which have prompted me to take this decision at this important juncture of the Indo-Pakistani subcontinent...

 “Before I narrate the remote and immediate causes of my resignation, it may be useful to give a short background of the important events that have taken place during the period of my cooperation with the League. Having been approached by a few prominent League leaders of Bengal in February 1943, I agreed to work with them in the Bengal Legislative Assembly. After the fall of the Fazlul Haq ministry in March 1943, with a party of 21 Scheduled Caste MLAs, I agreed to cooperate with Khwaja Nazimuddin, the then leader of the Muslim League parliamentary party who formed the Cabinet in April 1943.

 “Our cooperation was conditional on certain specific terms, such as the inclusion of three scheduled caste ministers in the cabinet, sanctioning of a sum of Rs 500,000 as annual recurring grant for the education of the scheduled castes, and the unqualified application of the communal ratio rules in the matter of appointment to Government services...

 “...For the sake of truth I must admit that I had always considered the demand of Pakistan by the Muslim League as a bargaining counter. Although I honestly felt that in the context of India as a whole, Muslims had legitimate cause for grievance against upper class Hindu chauvinism, I held the view very strongly indeed that the creation of Pakistan would never solve the communal problem. On the contrary, it would aggravate communal hatred and bitterness.

 “Besides, I maintained that it would not ameliorate the condition of Muslims in Pakistan. The inevitable result of the partition of the country would be to prolong, if not perpetuate, the poverty, illiteracy and miserable condition of the toiling masses of both the states. I further apprehended that Pakistan might turn to be one of the most backward and undeveloped countries of Southeast Asia.

 “I must make it clear that I have thought that an attempt would be made, as is being done at present, to develop Pakistan as a purely ‘Islamic’ state based on the shariat and the injunctions and formulae of Islam. I presumed that it would be set up in all essentials after the pattern contemplated in the Muslim League resolution adopted at Lahore on March 23, 1940. That resolution stated inter alia that...‘adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards should be specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in these units and in these regions for the protection of their religious, cultural, political, administrative and other rights and interests in consultation with them’.

 “...I was fortified in my faith in this resolution and the professions of the League Leadership by the statement Quaid-i-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah was pleased to make on the August 11, 1947 as the President of the Constituent Assembly giving solemn assurance of equal treatment for Hindus and Muslims alike and calling upon them to remember that they were all Pakistanis.

 “...Every one of these pledges is being flagrantly violated apparently to your knowledge and with your approval in complete disregard of the Quaid-e-Azam’s wishes and sentiments and to the detriment and humiliation of the minorities.

 “It may also be mentioned in this connection that I was opposed to the partition of Bengal. In launching a campaign in this regard I had to face not only tremendous resistance from all quarters but also unspeakable abuse, insult and dishonour...but I remained undaunted and unmoved in my loyalty to Pakistan. It is a matter of gratitude that my appeal to seven million scheduled caste people of Pakistan evoked a ready and enthusiastic response from them. They lent me their unstinted support, sympathy and encouragement. “After the establishment of Pakistan on August 14, 1947 you formed the Pakistan Cabinet, in which I was included and Khwaja Nazimuddin formed a provisional Cabinet for East Bengal. On August 10, I had spoken to Khwaja Nazimuddin at Karachi and requested him to take two scheduled caste ministers in the East Bengal cabinet. He promised to do the same sometime later. What happened subsequently in this regard was a record of unpleasant and disappointing negotiation with you, Khwaja Nazimuddin and Mr Nurul Amin, the present chief minister of East Bengal...

 “But alas! You did not perhaps mean what you said. Khwaja Nazimuddin did not keep his promise. After Mr Nurul Amin had become the chief minister of East Bengal, I again took up the matter with him. He also followed the same old familiar tactics of evasion...

 “When the question of partition of Bengal arose, the scheduled caste people were alarmed at the anticipated dangerous result of partition. Representations on their behalf were made to Mr Suhrawardy, the then chief minister of Bengal who was pleased to issue a statement to the press declaring that none of the rights and privileges hitherto enjoyed by the scheduled caste people would be curtailed after partition and that they would not only continue to enjoy the existing rights and privileges but also receive additional advantages. This assurance was given by Mr Suhrawardy not only in his personal capacity but also in his capacity as the chief minister of the League ministry.

 “To my utter regret it is to be stated that after partition, particularly after the death of Quaid-i-Azam, the scheduled castes have not received a fair deal in any matter. You will recollect that from time to time I brought the grievances of the scheduled castes to your notice. I explained to you on several occasions the nature of inefficient administration in East Bengal. I made serious charges against the police administration. I brought to your notice incidents of barbarous atrocities perpetrated by the police on frivolous grounds. I did not hesitate to bring to your notice the anti-Hindu policy pursued by the East Bengal government, especially the police administration and a section of Muslim League leaders...” So, what else is new in the Islamic Republic?

Liaquat Ali Khan and his role in Riots

Congress leaders advised Hindus to leave Sindh which was viewed by the Sindhi Muslim leadership as a ploy to deprive Sindh of its merchants, bankers, and sanitation workers. According to Brown University’s associate professor of history Vazira Zamindar’s book The Long Partition and the Making of Modern South Asia (Columbia University Press, 2007) : “Ayub Khuhro, the premier of Sindh, and other Sindhi leaders also attempted to retain Sindh’s minorities, for they also feared a loss of cultural identity with the Hindu exodus.” The Sindh government “attempted to use force to stem” the exodus “by passing the Sindh Maintenance of Public Safety Ordinance” in September 1947. On September 4, 1947 curfew had to be imposed in Nawabshah because of communal violence. It turned out that the policies of a local collector resulted in the exodus of a large Sikh community of Nawabshah to make room for an overflow of refugees from East Punjab. The Sindh government took stern action to suppress the violence. The Sindh government set up a Peace Board comprising Hindu and Muslim members to maintain order in the troubled province. PV Tahilramani was secretary of the Peace Board. He is the one who rushed to Khuhro’s office on January 6, 1948, at around 11am to inform the chief minister that the Sikhs in Guru Mandir areas of Karachi were being killed. According to Khuhro, senior bureaucrats and police officials were nowhere to be found and he rushed to the scene at around 12.30 pm where he saw “mobs of refugees armed with knives and sticks storming the temples”. Khuhro tried to stem the violence and Jinnah was pleased with his efforts. The prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, was angry with Khuhro when he went to see him on January 9 or 10. Liaquat said to Khuhro: “What sort of Muslim are you that you protect Hindus here when Muslims are being killed in India. Aren’t you ashamed of yourself!” In the third week of January 1948, Liaquat Ali Khan said the Sindh government must move out of Karachi and told Khuhro to “go make your capital in Hyderabad or somewhere else”. Liaquat said this during a cabinet meeting while Jinnah quietly listened. The Sindh Assembly passed a resolution on February 10, 1948, against the Centre’s impending move to annex Karachi. The central government had already taken over the power to allotment houses in Karachi. Khuhro was forced to quit and Karachi was handed over to the Centre in April 1948.

Liaquat Ali Khan N his Life [1896-1951]

Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan, the second son of Nawab Rustam Ali Khan, was born on October 1, 1896, in a Madal Pathan (Nausherwan) family. He graduated in 1918 from M. A. O. College, Aligarh. After his graduation, he was offered a job in the Indian Civil Services, but he rejected the offer on the plea that he wanted to serve his nation. He married his cousin, Jehangira Begum in 1918. After his marriage, he went to London for higher education. In 1921, he obtained a degree in Law from Oxford and was called to Bar at Inner Temple in 1922.
On his return from England in 1923, Liaquat Ali Khan decided to enter politics with the objective of liberating his homeland from the foreign yoke. Right from the very beginning, he was determined to eradicate the injustices and ill treatment meted out to the Indian Muslims by the British. In his early life, Liaquat Ali, like most of the Muslim leaders of his time, believed in Indian Nationalism. But his views gradually changed. The Congress leaders invited him to join their party, but he refused and joined the Muslim League in 1923. Under the leadership of Quaid-i-Azam, the Muslim League held its annual session in May 1924 in Lahore. The aim of this session was to revive the League. Liaquat Ali Khan attended this conference along many other young Muslims.

Liaquat Ali started his parliamentary career from the U. P. Legislative Assembly in 1926 as an independent candidate. Later he formed his own party, The Democratic Party, within the Legislative Assembly and was elected as its leader. He remained the member of the U. P. Legislative Council till 1940 when he was elected to the Central Legislative Assembly.

In his parliamentary career, Liaquat Ali Khan established his reputation as an eloquent, principled and honest spokesman who never compromised on his principles even in the face of severe odds. He used his influence and good offices for the liquidation of communal tension and bitterness. He took active part in legislative affairs. He was one of the members of the Muslim League delegation that attended the National Convention held at Calcutta to discuss the Nehru Report in December 1928.

Liaquat Ali's second marriage took place in 1933. His wife Begum Ra'ana was a distinguished economist and an educationist who stood by her husband during the ups and downs of his political career. She proved to be a valuable asset to his political career as well as his private life. Quaid-i-Azam in those days was in England in self-exile. The newly wed couple had a number of meetings with the Quaid and convinced him to come back to India to take up the leadership of the Muslims of the region.

When Quaid-i-Azam returned to India, he started reorganizing the Muslim League. Liaquat was elected as the Honorary Sectary of the party on April 26, 1936. He held the office till the establishment of Pakistan in 1947. In 1940, he was made the deputy leader of the Muslim League Parliamentary party. Quaid-i-Azam was not able to take active part in the proceedings of the Assembly on account of his heavy political work; thus the whole burden of protecting Muslim interests in the Assembly fell on Liaquat Ali's shoulders. Liaquat Ali was also the member of Muslim Masses Civil Defense Committee, which was formed to keep the Muslims safe from Congress activities and to strengthen the League's mission. Liaquat Ali Khan won the Central Legislature election in 1945-46 from the Meerut Constituency in U. P. He was also elected Chairman of the League's Central Parliamentary Board. He assisted Quaid-i-Azam in his negotiations with the members of the Cabinet Mission and the leaders of the Congress during the final phases of the Freedom Movement. When the Government asked the Muslim League to send their nominees for representation in the interim government, Liaquat was asked to lead the League group in the cabinet. He was given the portfolio of finance, which he handled brilliantly. He influenced the working of all the departments of the Government and presented a poor man's budget. His policies as Finance Minister helped in convincing the Congress to accept the Muslim demand of a separate homeland.

After independence, Quaid-i-Azam and Muslim League appointed Liaquat to be the head of the Pakistan Government. Being the first Prime Minister of the country, He had to deal with a number of difficulties facing Pakistan in its early days. Liaquat Ali Khan helped Quaid-i-Azam in solving the riot and refugee problem and setting up an effective administrative system for the country. After the death of Quaid-i-Azam, Liaquat tried to fill the vacuum created by the departure of the Father of the Nation. Under his premiership, Pakistan took its first steps in the field of constitution making, as well as foreign policy. He presented the Objectives Resolution in the Legislative Assembly. The house passed this on March 12, 1949. Under his leadership a team also drafted the first report of the Basic Principle Committee. His efforts in signing the Liaquat-Nehru pact pertaining to the minority issue in 1950 reduced tensions between India and Pakistan. In May 1951, he visited the United States and set the course of Pakistan's foreign policy towards closer ties with the West.

On October 16, 1951, Liaquat Ali Khan was assassinated. He had been scheduled to make an important announcement in a public meeting at Municipal Park, Rawalpindi. The security forces immediately shot the assassin, who was later identified as Saad Akbar. Killing the assassin erased all clues to the identity of the real culprit behind the murder. Liaquat Ali Khan was officially given the title of Shaheed-i-Millat, but the question of who was behind his murder is yet to be answered.

MemmOries

Click here to view the original image of 559x740px.

Click here to view the original image of 800x531px.

WHO MURDER LIAQUAT ALI KHAN?

The events of December 27th 2007 when the 3rd Pakistani Prime Minister was assassinated in Rawalpindi makes this research very poignant. Two decades ago we have read more about who shot JR and a lot less about who shot one of our greatest freedom fighters of Pakistan. We all wondered who shot Khan Liaqat Ali Khan? The American press is always trying to discover who actually planned the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. The media is obsessed with JFKs murder even though the murderer was captured. The Pakistani media is silent about Liaqat Ali Khan. The same forces that were responsible for the death of Benazir Bhutto are responsible for the death of Shaheed Millat.

Liaqat Ali Khan was the liberator of Kashmir. In 1947, Liaqat Ali Khan raised a fist at India warning it of staying away from Pakistan. As long as the fist was alive no neighboring country could dare lift a finger at Pakistan.


Colonel Akbar Khan. He adopted the rather ambitious nom de plume “Tariq”, after Tariq Bin Ziad, Arab conqueror of Spain in 712. He wrote two papers after ceasefire on January 1, 1949, “What Next in Kashmir?” and “Keep the Pot Boiling in Abdullah’s Kashmir”. Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan sanctioned Rs 1 million to arm a “people’s militia” in Indian Kashmir. The Abdullahs have moved into their third generation, but the blood in that pot has not stopped boiling…India and Pakistan: What kind of talk makes sense, By M J Akbar, Sunday, 21 February 2010 16:49

SUMMARY OF THE ARTICLE.
We have researched this issue at length. In the absence of an on the spot autopsy, the circumstantial and political evidence points to the political enemies of Khan Liaqat Ali Khana and Mohammad Ali Jinnah. The feudals of many areas did not support the creation of Pakistan. Urban voters were free to vote, and the wholehearted supported, Iqbal, Jinnah and Liaqat. If we look at the political landscape of the Subcontinental politics, we see the following:

Jinnah, Iqbal, and Liaqat were at odds with the anti-Pakistan, pro-Congress elements who were supported by the likes of Sir Chottu Ram and the Unionist party. Iqbal and Liquat were responsible for the creation of Muslim League in every town and village of the Subcontinent, and had transformed the League from an elitist group to a national party.
Jinnah, Liaqat. Iqbal, and the Muslim League won the day, and destroyed the Hyatt-Tiwana conspiracies led by their cohorts the Congress and SIr Chouttu Rams Zamindara party
Hyatt and Tiwana lost to the Muslim League but kept the vengeance in their harts.
Liaqat Ali Khan did not allow the UK and the US Pakistani facilities to attack Iran. There is a lot of suspicion on the CIA on this matter. Recent declassified documents shed light on a lot of information on this.
According to Gauhar Ayub, Liaqat Ali Khan had talked to King Zahir Shah who had agreed to a confederation with Pakistan.
The Finance Minister and openly defied Liaqat Ali Khan trying to run Foreign Affairs. He had the most to gain from the death of Liaqat Ali Khan and tried to come to power.
The Khaksar Tehrik and the Socialist Coalition wanted to to turn Pakistani into a Socialistic republic.
Liqat Ali Khan was supposed to announce land reforms and a close relationship with the Muslim world.
There is tremendous suspicious on Mushtaq Muhamamd, and Ghulam Muhammad. Ghulam Muhammad was supposedly the CIA man.
Both Jinnah and Liaqat faced numerous assassination attempts on thier lives by the same Unionist party or their fascist supports the Khaksars.
Jinnah escaped the attempts, and Liaqat did not.


LIAQAT ALI KHAN THE DAY DEMOCRACY DIED IN RAWALPINDI: Liaqat Ali Khan was the able lieutenant of the father of our nation. He was the first Prime Minister of our nation. He sowed the seeds of democracy and died fighting for democracy. Liaqat Ali Khan matched the spirit of Nehru and the tenacity of Patel. Liaqat Ali Khan had the vitality of George Washington, and the vision of Lincoln. He and Jinnah did for Pakistan what Kemal Ataturk had done for Turkey. Like Mao Tse Tung Liaqat and Jinnah led the countrymen to nationhood. For a brief shining moment, our nation glimpsed “Camelot”, where we were led by honest leaders, who’s only consideration was the task of building the nation. These incorruptible leaders had character, strength, and the mandate of the people. Like JFK, Liaqat Ali Khan was a young, popular and charismatic leader who had led the nation ‘across the read’ sea and was immersed in the task of building an infrastructure for the new country. But forces opposed to democracy cut him in half.

WHO SHOT LAK?..CIA CONNECTION

Under headline reading “Is Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination result of a deep-laid American conspiracy?”, leftist Urdu daily Bhopal named Nadeem published article October 24 charging US with responsibility. Summary article follows:

[...]It was learned within Pakistani Foreign Office that while UK pressing Pakistan for support re Iran, US demanded Pakistan exploit influence with Iran and support Iran transfer oil fields to US. Liaquat declined request. US threatened annul secret pact re Kashmir. Liaquat replied Pakistan had annexed half Kashmir without American support and would be able to take other half. Liaquat also asked US evacuate air bases under pact. Liaquat demand was bombshell in Washington. American rulers who had been dreaming conquering Soviet Russia from Pakistan air bases were flabbergasted. American minds set thinking re plot assassinate Liaquat. US wanted Muslim assassin to obviate international complications. US could not find traitor in Pakistan as had been managed Iran, Iraq, Jordan. Washington rulers sounded US Embassy Kabul. American Embassy contacted Pashtoonistan leaders, observing Liaquat their only hurdle; assured them if some of them could kill Liaquat, US would undertake establish Pashtoonistan by 1952. Pashtoon leaders induced Akbar undertake job and also made arrangements kill him to conceal conspiracy. USG-Liaquat differences recently revealed by Graham report to SC; Graham had suddenly opposed Pakistan although he had never given such indication. [...] Cartridges recovered from Liaquat body were American-made, especially for use high-ranking American officers, usually not available in market. All these factors prove real culprit behind assassin is US Government, which committed similar acts in mid-East. “Snakes” of Washington’s dollar imperialism adopted these mean tactics long time ago.Confidential Telegram No. 1532 from New Delhi Embassy, Oct. 30, 1951

Since article apparently not rpt not widely circulated, Department believes preferable not rpt not issue public denial. In its discretion, however, Embassy might informally mention case MEA with comment story so preposterous no rpt no public denial intended. Would be interesting to know whether this story of character which led adoption recent press law. Ownership management NADEEM should be discreetly be investigated. Confidential Telegram from State Dept., Nov. 1, 1951

Soviet Press today carried Prague Despatch reporting Rude Pravo article based Afghan press agency “Bahtar” information re assassination Liaquat Ali. Despatch states after escaping Afghanistan due murders and other crimes “Said Akbar ran to India and there under protection British authorities which gave him refuge in Abbotabad and provided him money. After partition India Akbar remained in Pakistan where he continued make use protection of certain British circles.” “These facts adduced by Afghan press supporting position that murder Liaquat Ali was result intrigue of imperialists in Asian countries.” Secret Telegram from Moscow Embassy, Nov. 3, 1951 [only first page located]

The Embassy questions the premise stated in the first sentence of the Airgram under reference (“Lack of spontaneous anti-Indian and anti-Afghan popular outburst over both July war scare and Liaquat’s assassination suggests feeling on Kashmir and Afghan disputes mostly government inspired.”) … The anti-Afghan agigation that spontaneously sprang up on October 16-17 was effectively stopped by the GOP’s prompt exercise of its official and unofficial powers of censorship over the press, even to the extent of preventing reference after October 17 to the assassin’s Afghan origin. Popular Feeling in Pakistan on Kashmir and Afghan Issues, Nov. 10, 1951

One almost never hears about the culprits in the assassination of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan…. the first victim of our nascent nation. After his death democracy was forced to fail and dictators ruled the Pakistani landscape.

Since the autopsies done on the body of the Khan has NOT revealed much, let us do an autopsy of the politics of our time. There have been several books written on the man, and a wealth of information is revealed in them.

LIAQAT ALI KHAN, THE MAN, ONE OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS, THE FREEDOM FIGHTER, THE LIBERATOR OF KASHMIR & THE FIRST PRIME MINISTER

Liaqat Ali Khan was a born in a rich family, but he gave up his lands for freedom and for Pakistan.

All through the forties, Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah had picked patriots who would lead the nation to freedom. These men were loyal not only to Quaid-e-Azam and the Muslim League, these men were loyal to the cause of Pakistan. Both created and led the Muslim League and battled the British and engaged the Congress for the independent nation of Pakistan. Throughout the trials and tribulations, Liaqat Ali Khan and Jinnah went through one constitutional crises after the other and faced the elections. From the Khilafat movement, to the cause of the separate electorate, through the Cabinet Mission Plan, through the pre-partition governments, the Khan and Jinnah led the Muslim League and the nation towards Pakistan.

In little towns and in big villages, the All India Muslim League opened offices and built a grass roots movement that was supported by the Mussalmans of Bharat. Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan were painfully aware that the Muslims had no voice in the press. In order to combat the propoganda of its enemies, the Muslim League needed a voice. The created from scratch newspapers that would carry the Muslim League message. In 1945, the created the newspaper called ‘Dawn’. They also created the paper called “Pakistan Times’ and they created other papers called Patriots etc.

Here is a message from the Honorable Liaqat Ali Khan, Premier of Pakistan. Dated Delhi, 5th August, 1947:

” Now that the great day has come when we have not only achieved freedom from foreign domination but also regained our long lost opportunity for national development. I wish to convey to our people a message of goodwill and good cheer on this day when the Muslim state of our dreams has become a reality. Let us not forget that his has been achieved not by the efforts of Muslims in Pakistan alone, but even more by the sufferings of millions living in Muslim minority provinces. I hope that although henceforth the frontiers of the two states will divide the Muslims of this Subcontinent, the ties of brotherhood will endure, because the Islamic fraternity knows no political or geographical barriers. I have no doubt that the Muslims of Pakistan will ever regard the Muslims of Hindustan as part of themsleves and give them equal opportunities in their own state. I am confident also that the Muslims in Hindustan will be loyal citizens of their state and play an important and honorable role in the progress and prosperity.” Sd. Liaqat Ali Khan.

Liaqat Ali Khan was incorruptible. Here is an editorial printed in the Nation on Friday, February 28, 1997, Lahore, “Banish the factotums, sir”, written by Khalid Hasan :

“In the early years of Pakistan, the leaders lived with simplicity. Mr Liaquat AliKhan, who used to be rich in his own right before independence, lived simply. He was accessibleand there were hardly any barriers between him and those who considered him the Quaid-i-Azam’s heir and his most trusted deputy. We all know that when the Nawabzada died, he had no money in the bank. That is the example our present-day leaders need to follow and not that of oriental potentates, colonial overlords and slave plantation kings.”

As Prime Minster of Pakistan Liaqat Ali secured the borders of Pakistan, LIBERATED one third of Kashmir (and would have liberated ALL of it if HIS plan had worked), and internationalized (through agreements with the USA) the boundaries of Pakistan by ensuring that the USSR through its proxies (India or Afghanistan) could not cross them.

LIAQAT TAKES OVER A PRECARIOUS POLITICAL LANDSCAPE

1947, was a precarious time for Pakistan. The newly won freedom was in jeopardy. The flame of Pakistani Muslim liberty was in danger of being extinguished. Liaqat Ali Khan became prime minister of Pakistan when the anti-Pakistan Unionist loyalists (who had been in cahoots with the Indian National Congress) landlords and the anti-Muslim League feudals were waiting in the wings to take over the political machinery of the new country. This was an accident waiting to happen.

In Sindh the landlords were mostly Hindu and these landlords fled to India. In the Punjab and Sarhad they were the Badshah Khans and the Khizar Hyatts who had opposed the Quaid-e-Azam.

After the death of Quaid-e-Azam the feudals wanted to take over the nascent country. The feudals had opposed Pakistan. For the feudals the only roadblocks to power were the patriots who had led the Pakistan movement. I.I. Chundrigarh, Feroze Khan Noon and Khan Liaqat Ali Khan. Once the Bengali leadership of the Muslim League was harassed and removed, then it was necessary to begin removing the political infra-structure of Pakistan that had been built by the Quaid-e-Azam himself. The Muslim League leaders faced the wrath of the feudals. The Quaid and Khan Liaqat Ali Khan had defeated the feudals in their Unionist party which was in an alliance with the Indian National Congress (INC). Now the feudals were out to take revenge from the leadership of the Muslim that had shepherded the nation to freedom.

Mohammad Ali Jinnah had terminal cancer and he died an early death. The actual circumstances of the death of the Quaid are shrouded in mystery, confusion and perhaps even conspiracy.

Several Pakistani prime ministers tried to illegally take over the reigns of government through extra-constitutional means, but the machinations of the feudals did not allow them to rule. These machinations were the earliest seed of discontent sown into the minds of the Bengalis because they saw the Bengali leadership of the Muslim League harassed and shunted out of the Muslim League.

Pakistan was born under the Mountbatten-Indian premise that the country would last a few weeks and the Muslims would learn their lesson and then come begging back to India to take them back. In fact Lord Mountbatten had offered and insisted on becoming the joint Governor General of both India and Pakistan. This unique head of both the states would have facilitated the early demise of the state of Pakistan. Quaid-e-Azam and Liaqat Ali Khan saw through the ruse and asked Lord Mountbatten whose anti Pakistan and anti-Muslim stand had already been proven several times over not to become the governor general of Pakistan.

EXTERNAL THREAT TO PAKISTAN NULLIFIED THROUGH STRATEGIC ALLIANCES

Many Hindus and Gandhi did not oppose Pakistan. Some like Patel did. The opponents were fierce vitriolic and vociferous. Right after Pakistan was created, some of the radical Hindus considered this a temporary situation and called it a temporary partition of the country of India. When the new country lasted for a few months, India began flexing its muscles. One of the first test of Pakistani sovereignty came when India devalued her currency and wanted Pakistan to do the same. Liaqat Ali Khan refused, and angry India tightened the screws and imposed a trade embargo against Pakistan. All cross border trade came to a halt. This was the initiation of cessation of trade that has still not been really revived, even in modern times.

With China still embroiled in its communist struggle, Asia was recognized as India. In British eyes, India was the major power in the India. In the early nineteenth century, America proudly proclaimed that “it was manifest destiny that the USA should span from the Atlantic to the Pacific.” The Soviet Union extended from the Pacific to the Atlantic. With British imperial might, and India the crown jewel of the empire, India too saw her destiny as great as the superpowers.

THE NEHRU DOCTRINE FACES LIAQAT ALI KHANS PATRIOTIC FIST

The Nehru doctrine was a natural extension of Indian nationalism. Nehrus dreams of India as one of hte major nations of the world are elequently quoted in his letters to his daughter “Glimpses of World History”, a very welll written book on the history of the world. The stature of Nehrus intelligence can be judged from the fact that Nehru wrote the book from memory while he was in jail.

To many Indians religion was a personal matter and did not want the state to interfere in it. Rightly or wrongly they saw Jinnah using the ruse of religion to gain power. Some Indians felt that Indian nationalism and dreams had run aground by the creation of Pakistan. “Partition” had stopped the land routes to Europe and divided the focus of its attention. Had she been cut down to size? Reeling from partition, Patel started to consolidate the rest of the “nation”. Nehru would not allow 550 Indias. Nehru and Patel wanted to create the Indian nationality by creating a contiguous Subcontinent. She had taken over Kashmir, Junagarh and had taken over Hyderabad. India was threatening Pakistan. Pakistani nationalism now tested the limits of Indian consolidation. Liaqat Ali Khan looked for cracks in the consolidation. Liaqat Ali Khan saw what was coming and used the tribesmen to take advantage of the rebellion in Kashmir and liberate the state. All Kashmiris remember Liaqat Ali Khan with fondness because he is the real liberator of Azad Kashmir. Were it not for Liaqat Ali Khan ALL of Kashmir would today be part of India.

Like Nehru, Khan was also embroiled in the task of nation building. Like Nehru, Khan also faced daunting odds. Unlike Nehru, Khan was the ruler of a state with very powerful feudal enemies. These enemies had sworn the destruction of the country. These feudals saw Khan between them and their allies and friends the Indian National Congress. Khan Liaqat Ali Khan began to create a sovereign nation. He saw the vision to create natural and artificial boundaries around the country. He ordered the digging of the BRB canal along the Wagah border. The Indians were to learn the importance of what they call “Khawjal Canal” during the 1965 war because this canal provided Pakistan a natural defense barrier against the advancing Indian army. When things got too hot for India in Kashmir and Pakistani troops under Tikka Khan and the freedom fighters were only 35 miles away from Srinagar, India wanted to cross the international border at Batapur and Run of Katch. The Americans in 1965 had guaranteed to Pakistan that Kashmir was disputed territory and India would not cross the international border. India tired to but the rangers kept them at bay along the BRB canal that was designed and built during the reign of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan

It was under these circumstances that Khan Liaqat Ali Khan took the reigns of office. He struggled to do the following:

1) Guard Pakistan against a belligerent India which wanted to reintegrate Pakistan into India

2) Watch the back of Pakistan against the Indian ally Zahir Shah of Afghanistan

3) Tried to create an external strategic alliance with the USA and sold the idea to the West that Pakistan would be a reliable bulwark against the socialistic India-USSR nexus

LIAQAT ALI KHAN NEGATES THE SOVIET THREAT

Liaqat Ali Khan saw the growing menace of the Soviet threat. He had been monitoring the expansion of the Russian empire into the six Muslim states, and he had watched the integration of independent Muslim republics into the USSR. He has also seen the forced deportation of the Chechnyans and Tartars to Siberia as reprisals for resisting the Sovietization of the Muslim peoples.

Liaqat Ali Khan saw the growing relations of the USSR with Afghanistan as a clear threat to Pakistan’s sovereignty. Khan went to the US and laid the foundation of a very log term alliance with the USA. This alliance immediately opened up the flood gates of American aid to Pakistan. The initial aid came in the form of German war crime reparation that were given to Pakistan. This put money in the treasury. The next step was UN and Direct USAID to Pakistan. With American protection the existence of Pakistan was guaranteed, or else the nascent nation may have succumbed to the twin USSR-Indian and Sino-Indain threat.

INTERNAL THREAT SUPPRESSED THROUGH STRATEGIC COALITIONS

Jinnah and Khan had generated a cadre of loyal politicians that supported the Muslim League. Liaqat Ali Khan wanted to bank on the traditional allies that both he and Mohammad Ali Jinnah had created across the land of Pakistan. However these were hard to come by because many of the Aligarh led student movement leaders were now back to the grind earning a living. Liaqat Ali Khan was in the process of forming alliances in the Punjab and the NWFP. He trusted the leaders that had supported the Muslim League and he trusted the leaders that had supported Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan did not trust the leaders that had opposed Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan did not trust the leadership of the Unionist party that was in alliance with the Indian National Congress.

Khan through a series of steps tried to create consensus within the boundaries of Pakistan:

1) Tried to germinate local pro-Muslim leadership in Bengal by supporting the pro-Pakistani Bengali leaders against the pro-Indian and United Bengal nationalist leaders who wanted an independent Bengal.

2) Watched the antics of G.M. Syed whose off again and on again loyalties to the Muslim League and/or Gandhi rendered him un-trustworthy.

3) Tried create Muslim League alliances in two provinces where there was the anti-Muslim League parties playing on the sentiments of the people. Namely it was the Khizar Hyatt led Unionist government in the Punjab and a Ghaffar Khan led government in NWFP.

Liaqat Ali Khan formed the constituent assembly and set upon the task of creating serious structures which would assist the country in the future. All Pakistani constitutions were based on the work of the first constitution. The original 1953 constitution was the basis of the 1973 constitution that is preserved more or less by our courts today.

Recommend Department ignore article summarized in Delhi’s 1532. It is compilation of utter falsehoods whose vituperation is some degree worse than articles that appear from time to time in Bombay’s Commie-line “Blitz”. To issue any statement labeling the facts in the article as lies will only give Nadeem an importance it does not merit. The investigation into background of Liaquat’s assassination is being conducted with extreme care and well guarded secrecy. Gurmani tells me an intercept has been obtained which if backed up by further material may reveal the assassination had some inspiration and followed the pattern of Razmara’s assassination in Teheran. Confidential Telegram from Karachi Embasssy, Oct. 31, 1951

FORTIES: THE FEUDAL UNIONISTS HAD OPPOSED PAKISTAN AND THE MUSLIM LEAGUE

The Unionist Party had opposed Pakistan, had opposed the Muslim League, had opposed the Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah and had opposed Liaqat Ali Khan. After the death of Jinnah their wrath turned to Khan Liaqat Ali Khan. How could the Unionist oppose a trusted lieutenant of the Quaid? How could they oppose one of the greatest freedom fighters of the struggle for Pakistan? How could the Unionists oppose the leader of the Muslim League—the party that created Pakistan and opposed the Unionists in the Punjab? The Khan had many friends and supporters in the Punjab. The Khan was responsible for creating and nourishing the Muslim League in the Punjab. He had counted on and got the support of the people of Punjab. The Muslim League had defeated the Unionists in the polls.

Here is a quote from the book “HAD THERE BEEN NO JINNAH” (@1989 by Salahuddin Khan Printed by: PanGraphics (Pvt) Ltd. Islamabad. Pages 14-15.

“From this stage, conflict between the Congress and the Muslim League became increasingly sharp. The Muslim League under the skilful leadership of Jinnah set itself to strengthen its organization, extend its basis of supportamong the Muslim masses, and consolidate the various Muslim groups and organizations so as to make the Muslim League the main Organization of the Muslims in India. During the period 1937-45 a decisive change took place in the position and relative strength of the Muslim League, as it won increasing mass support among the Muslims. The 1946 elections reveal the changed position.In the Central and Provincial Legislative Assemblyelections the Muslim League won 460 out of 533 Muslim seats. There can be no doubt, that during this period the Muslim League had established its position as the major political organization among Muslims in India. It had been the original aim of the Congress to include equally Hindus and Muslims. But, in practice, this aim was never realised in the proportions of membership won.In January 1938, according to a press statement issuedby Nehru, out of 3.1 millions members of Congress, only1,00,000, that is 3.2% were Muslims; overwhelming majority of the newly awakened sections of the Muslims turned to the Muslim League as their political organization.”

The victories in 1946 were at the expense of the pro-Congress Unionists in the Punjab. In the face of very strong popular grass-roots political support for Pakistan, the Muslim League and Liaqat Ali Khan the Hyattis were trying to figure to how to oppose Quaid-e-Azam and the Muslim League. The Khizar Hyatt political machinery could not find anything against Liaqat Ali Khan, so they used the race card. The Khizar Hyatt Unionist Party propaganda had painted Liaqat Ali Khan as an opponent of Punjabis. Nothing could be further from the truth. Liaqat Ali Khan opposed the feudal Unionist leaders like Khizar Hyatt who had opposed Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan had many friends in the Punjab who had helped him defeat the Unionists at the polls. It is little known that L.A Khan was born in Karnal East Punjab. Here are some notes on the origins of Liaqat Ali Khan. I quote from p.27 of book by Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad ,Liaquat Ali Khan: builder of Pakistan.

“The family, Before settling down in Karnal in thePunjab in the 19th century, lived on the other side of the Jamna in Muzaffarnagar (U.P., India) for some generations, where they owned bigestates. Even after he settled down in Delhi, he took keen interest in the amelioratin and betterment of the Muslims of Muzaffarnagar.”

The Unionist element tried to rally support against Khan Liaqat Ali Khan by playing up the ethnic race card. Liaqat Ali Khan was born in Karnal East Punjab with friends and relatives on both sides of the border. The Khan had very strong ties to East Punjab. However this fact was concealed and many Khizar Hyatt Khan supporters falsly labeled him.

THE ASSASSINATION OF DEMOCRACY IN RAWALPINDI—A CIA PLOT?

Liaqat Ali Khan was killed in broad daylight in Rawalpindi. This is what Zeba Zubair in Mutiny to Mountbatten says about the assassination:

“On 16 October 1951 at a Public Meeting in Rawalpindi, ‘a blind shot from the blue’ silenced the voice of Quaid-e-Millat, Nawabzadah Liaqat Ali Khan. Another epoch of history was at an end. On a sad day for this new nation it was as if a mighty powe in heaven was also reacting in anger at the cowardly act of mankind. The sky of Karachi had a peculiar and ominous orange-yellow colouring and the people felt resltell at the starnge weather…”

This is what the Daily dawn of October 17th, 1951 said:

‘With the kalima on his lips, Liaqat , Successor of the Quaid-e-Azam Prime Minister. Leader unparalleled, is dead. The man who killed him was not just an individual he was the symbol of that deadly enmity of the enemies of Islam who have always wanted to destroy Pakistan. We name only one but we feel this in our heart with the certain flash and convinced truth. We grieve for Liaqat–martyr to Pakistan and Islam; but we proclaim over Liaqat’s still unburied body: Pakistan shall live, and whoever of her servants may fall in her service, this citadel of Islam guarded by 70 million worshippers of Allah will never fall. Begum Liaqat, Ashraf and Akbar, we shall not try to console you in your grief in consolable, but know this, that you beloved husband and father had died in glory and as comes only to the chosen of God. Pakistan Zindabad (Dawn Editorial, 17 October, 1951)”

Even in his last moments he was thinking of his nation. Other then remembering God and reciting the kalima, his last words were “Allah Pakistan ko apni amaan mai~n rakhay “(God save Pakistan). Every Pakistani of that generation absolutely remembers where he was and what he was doing when that fatal shot was announced on Radio Pakistan. Every patriotic Pakistani cried that day.

” A few yards away for the body of the founder of the Pakistan now rests its eternal sleep the body of the builder of Pakistan. Both died in harness and both died for Pakistan. The Quaid-e-Azam worked his body way to waste; the Quaid-e-Millat fearlessly exposed his body to danger for his love of duty and country. The master and the disciple, the twin servants of Islam who in this century added perhaps the most glorious chapter to Islam’s temporal history, now meet heaven. Like twin stars, unseen but their presence always felt, their blessings will be continually showered on the land which the one founded, and the other built up to a state of stability and strength form which progress forward is inevitable because of its own momentum. It is now for the nation which they served so well, to carry on their work, and in particular make the blood of martyred Liaqat blossom to all of us. But upon the new leader who has been chosen by the team left behind by Liaqat the main burned if it will fall, the choice has been will and wisely made..

Khawaja Nazimuddin, our new Prime Minister and Liaqat’s successor as leader of this nation……”(Dawn editorial October 1951)

This is what Javed Jabbar says about the assassination in Rawalpindi in an article in the Nation (Feb 26th, 1997) entitled Accountability: history and truth.

“Distortions in our relationship with accountability have an even more historic dimension. During the lifetime of the Quaid-i-Azam himself, within weeks and months of the creation of Pakistan, reports began to emerge about corruption at high levels in government. One of the major figures who despaired at this early neglect of accountability was Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan. Then came the assassination of our first Prime Minister Quaid-i-Millat Liaquat Ali Khan. A man who was so financially incorruptible as to leave only a paltry sum in his bank account deserved to have his killers held to account for their heinous crime. Over the past forty-five years, speculative interpretations name prominent individuals as suspects in the Liaquat assassination. The official inquiry was not received as a credible analysis. In addition to the original stain of financial corruption on the white and spotlessly clean garment of accountability were now added the red stains of blood: people could actually get away with murder.”

The Shaheed-e-Millat was so scrupulously honest that when he died, he had holes in his socks. This was the man that presented the Crescent and Star “Khanjar hilal ka hai qaumi nitaa~n hamaara” to the constituent National Assembly of Pakistan. His famous closed fist remained a symbol of defiance to India, and it remained a symbol of our sovereignty.

Right after the assassination of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan, the patsy—actual murderer (the man who pulled the trigger) was caught and killed immediately (lest he spill the beans). Lee Harvey Oswald suffered the same fate when he actually started talking. However the real murderers the people who ordered the death of a the first prime minister of Pakistan not only remained at large, they actually benefited from his death. As a final insult to the slain freedom-fighter Liaqat Bagh (the site of his assassination) was turned into a bus stop and the promised garden to this date remains a commercial cess pot.

The day Liaqat Ali Khan died , democracy died in Pakistan. Dictators took over the reigns of the government and abrogated the constituent assembly. On 23rd October, Ghulam Mohammad dissilved the Constituent Assembly and with it, any semblance of constitutional legitimacy. Altaf. This is what the Daily Dawn said in one of its editorials, and it gives a brief synopsis of the events leading to and the events that occurred right after the death of the Shaheed-e-Millat:

“Since birth Pakistan has had four major nights of crisis. On the night of September 11. The Father of the nation died. On the night of October 16, 1951, the nation held its breath, dazed by the murder of its builder, Liaqat. On the night of April 17, 1953,a Government headed by the President of the Muslim League was flicked off the ash from a cigar-tip. On the night of October 23, 1954 (because it was then, we think that the decision was taken) the constituent Assembly of Pakistan was believed to be sovereign body, was wiped off the country’s political map like one wipes spilt milk form a table….(Dawn: 27 October, 1954)”

This abrogation kept Pakistan without a real constitution till 1973 The 1956 and 1963 constitutions were abrogated and martial laws imposed in 1958 and 1969. A lack of constitutional protection to the Bengalis and other citizens of Pakistan led to the creation of deep suspicions in the minds of the common Pakistanis, specially the Bengalis.

THE BENEFICIARIES FROM LIAQAT ALI KHANS DEATH

It is obvious that the assassins of Khan Liaqat Ali Khan were the parties and leaders who benefited from his death. After removing the elected prime minister from office through murder, the feudals tried to marginalize the Bengalis. As a result of the conspiracy the constitution was abrogated and the military feudal complex took over Pakistan. The feudals and their sentries the army took over the reins of the country and never let go.

It is based on these grains of truth that Ayesha Jalal and the Indian text books claim that the Muslim League was supported by the landlords. Before the creation of Pakistan these feudals opposed the Muslim League tooth and nail. It is unfortunate for our country that these feudals became the rulers of Pakistan after Liaqat Ali Khan. The rest as they say is history. For a list of Muslim League enemies, one does not have to go far. A directory of officers of the Unionist Party along with the list of the Khaksars (who actually did make many attempts on Muslim League leaders). For details on the Muslim League-Unionist animosity please see my article called “The Fifth Column” posted on soc.culture.pakistan.history.

This is what Javed Jabbar says about the assassination in Rawalpindi in an article in the Nation (Feb 26th, 1997) entitled Accountability: history and truth.

“When the black gowns of the superior judiciary joined the blood-stained garb of accountability, a decisive turning point was passed. The legitimisation of the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly by Governor-General Ghulam Muhammad and his dismissal of Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin established a new ground norm that went beyond the justified and unavoidable dismissal of Dr Khan Sahib’s NWFP government in August 1948, when the provincial regime declined to accept even the symbolic elements of the new state of Pakistan.”

THE KHAKSARS FASCISTS ATTEMPTED MANY ASSASSINATIONS ON THE QUAID-E-AZAM. DID THE UNIONISTS-KHAKSARS WITH THE HELP OF THE CIA ASSASSINATE LIAQAT ALI KHAN?

Vacuity of ideas did not prevent losers from forming parties. There are many inconsequential movements in the Subcontinent, whose mention is but a footnote in the historical records. The Khaksars are but one of the failed movements that achieved nothing. Being proud of the Khaksars is like being proud of the KKK or being proud of the Nazis of German or the Fascists of Italy. The only difference is that the Nazis and the Fascist caught the imagination of the Italians and the Germans. The Khaksars only caught the imagination of the demented few in the Punjab. Their claim to fame was repeated assassination attempts on the Quaid-e-Azam, Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

The fundamentalist militia group calling itself the Khaksars were led by their mouse-hearted salar Agha Zaigham in 1938-40. They got their inspiration from the brown shirts of Italy. They patterned their uniforms and their marching style from Mousolinni and his Fascist Party. They were anarchists who wanted total control over everything.

I quote Stanley Wolpert (Jinnah of Pakistan, Page 180):

” Paramilitary Muslim Khaksars were as hostile towards the Muslim League as they were anti-Hindu and anti-Sikh……..As a whole however, the Khaksars never reconciled to Jinnah’s leadership and tried more than once in the next few years to assassinate him”

The Muslim League led by the Quaid-e-Azam and their march towards Pakistan was an impediment to their fascist dreams. I quote the incident from Jinnah of Pakistan by Stanley Wolpert: Page 224.

“Jinnah returned to Bombay from his tour of Baluchistan on Friday, July 23. Three days later, on the afternoon of Monday, July 26, a fanatical young Muslim Khaksar from Lahore, Rafique Sabir Mazangavi, entered the Quaid-i-Azam’s Mount Pleasant Road house and appealed to Jinnah’s secretary, Mr. M.H.Saiyed for an interview with the great leader. Just then Jinnah entered his secretary’s office and asken who Tafiq was and what he wanted ‘I was very busy’, Jinnah testified later in Bombay’s high court. My whole mind was on my correspondence and I was trying to get out of the room. Just as I was about to leave the room, in the twinkling of an eye, the accused sprang on me and gave me a blow with his clenched fist on my left jaw. I naturally reeled back a bit when he pulled out a knife from his wrist….It was an open knife….Instinct of self-defence made me put out my hand and catch his wrist, with the result that the momentum of the blow was broken but in spite of this the knife touched the left side of my jaw. I got a cut near my chin and my coat near the left-shoulder…I also got a wound on my left finger.

The last meeting of the All India Muslim League was held on June 10, 1947…..Here is another incident narrated by Wolpert in Jinnah of Pakistan on Page 329:

“Khaksars rushed in through the once-tranquil garden, entering the hotel lounge ‘brandishing belchas, or sharpened spades…shouting get Jinnah!’ half way up the staircase leading to the ballroom where Jinnah and the Council were ….in session before…League National Guards could grapple with them and turn them back. It took police with tear gas to bring the disturbance to an end. Some fifty Khaksar would-be assassins were arrested….

The movement ended without achieving any results. The Muslim League routed them at the polls and eliminated their attempts at arson and carnage. Their assassination attempts on the Quaid-e-Azam were unsuccessful. Liaqat Ali Khan however did get assassinated.

CRITICISM OF KHAN LIAQAT ALI KHAN

No Pakistani leader can be put on a pedastal and worshipped. Liaqat Ali Khan was a politician, and he faced the political wrath of his opponents. The purpose of presenting his criticism is to learn from history. Could he have formed better alliances with the Unionists? Could he have curried favor with the Hyatts? Could he have practised more inclusion? Could he have have created more consensus politics? The answer to all the questions is yes. But he lived under enormous pressure. He was a freedom fighter. He was unable to enjoy the fruits of his victories like Fidel Castro. He was unlucky for he did not have the life of Boumediene who was able to lead Algeria to victory, and then was able to give stability and direction to the new nation. Like the Indonesian Sukarno, Liaqat did not survive to enjoy his victories. Like Hazrat Usman, Liaqat Ali Khan faced the charge of nepotism, and like Usman, he too was murdered by his opponents. If a man is known by the stature of his opponents, then Liaqat Ali Khan indeed was a great man.

The Khan was brutally honest, and he was a patriot till his last breath. He had no bank accounts and he built no empires for himself. After his death, his wife Rana Liaqat Ali Khan, had to work as government servant to support the family till she died. The ahtishab commission would have absolved him, for he was never charged with any personal crime of corruption. His struggle with the feudals was the struggle for Pakistan. Shaukat Hyatt has criticized the Quaid and the Muslim League in his ‘memoirs”. Hyatts agenda is clear. Demonize the Khan and demonize Jinnah. Rock the foundations of the leadership of the Muslim League and this will crumble the history on which the country stands. The opponents point of view has to be understood and rebutted. Here is the criticism of the Khan by his greatest enemy.

Sardar Shaukat Hayat Khan, the last of the prominent Muslim League leaders, has this to say in his Memoirs, “The nationa that lost its soul”, p. 178.

“He (Liaqat Ali Khan) delayed the completion of the Constitution to avoidelections which he could not win because he had no seat in Pakistan and had to be elected by East Pakistan. He, on the advice of officers belonging tothe United Provinces, broke the Liaqat-Nehru Pact about the agreed areas for migration from India to Pakistan, requiring the record of property to beexchanged officially. He, quite against the agreement permitted inhabitantsof UP and Rajasthan to enter via Khokhrapar – thus opening floodgatesendangering the stability of the already overloaded boat of Pakistan. Iobjected to this in the assembly. This action of Liaqat was quite partialallowing only people from his old Province and the adjoining areas tomigrate unfairly into Pakistan in order to create a seat for himself in Karachi. The people of the rest of the India were left to stew in their own juice. This act of his created a lot of confusion with people getting allotments in Sindh, without records on each other’s dubious evidence. This led to the problems of MQM and their hatred by Sindhis. These refugees got a monopoly of jobs in the cities and deprived local Pakistanis of their rightful share. The political instability still persists.”(source: Page 178 from the “Nation that lost its soul”, enclosed as Vol 2.5 in the document)

Unable to find any flaws with the character and strategy of the freedom fighting Khan, Hyatt uses the race card to discredit the Shaeed-e-Millat. The above criticism of the Khan is invalid due to the following reasons:

In 1947 Forty percent of Pakistan was Hindu and Sikh, and more than 60% of Lahore was Hindu and Sikh. If Pakistan had remained a state with these population ratios, the viability of the fledgling state was at stake. A Pakistani nation with 40% Hindus and Sikh could hardly be called Islamic and could hardly have any laws that would allow the propagation of Islam.
The bulk of migration into Pakistan occurred across the Punjab border and involved the Muslim Panjabis headed West to West Punjab, and the Hindu and Sikh Punjabis headed East to East Punjab (and Haryana). Lahore, Rawalpindi, Sargodha and Sialkot and other major cities of the Punjab were actually all Hindu or Hindu dominated cities.
Most of the Muslim migration was not into Sindh and it was not out of the UP. In the period right after independence, five Million East Punjabis were exchanged with five million West Punjabi Hindus and Sikhs. About 1.5 million Kashmiris migrated to Lahore. The families of Muslim Leaguers like Nawaz Sharif are progeny of that Kashmiri Muslim migration.
The Nehru-Liaqat pact was not adhered to. The Nehru-Liaqat pact died the day, India refused the transfer of the assets to the government of Pakistan–planes, cars, chairs, gold and bullion. It also died the day, Patel sent his police action into Hydrabad. It died the day Junagarh was denied its right to accede to Pakistan. It died long before Hari Singh acceeded to India.
5) Gurdspur was a Muslim majority area in East Punjab. Gurdaspur was in the natural line of demarcation to be in Pakistan. It was on the Pakistani side of the river. The Radcliff commission gave away Gurdaspur to India because it provided an Indian road link to Kashmir. Gurdaspur had Pakistani flags fluttering everwhere. It was given to India. Read Minto to see the details of the massacre and the rape Muslims in Gurdaspur. The majority of the Muslim majority Punjabi inhabitants were now set on the “Pakistan specials” bound for Lahore and Pakistan. The same story went on in many many town and villages. For details please see Collins (Freedom at Midnight). The Nehru-Liaqat pact faced these types of human tragedies.
The Hyatt criticism fails to mention the alliances Liaqat Ali Khan had with many other Non-Unioninst, independent and Muslim League Punjabi leaders. Liaqat Ali Khan founded the Punjab Muslim League, nurtured it and used it to defeat the Unionists. The League struggle against the Congress allied with the Unionists is not mentioned by the Hyatt memoirs. The Khan and the League were popular in the Punjab, he had electoral victories in the Punjab to prove this fact. The creation of Pakistan was indeed possible because the Congress-Unionist alliance was defeated in the Punjab.
The Khan formed alliances and chose pro-Pakistani elements. It is obvious that he did not promote the likes of Hyatt because he did not want pro-Congress sympathizers in his government. Many/most of the early Muslim Leagers from the Punjab were the allies of the Khan. These very leaders formed the intelligentsia of the Punjab and Pakistan today.
The instability in Sindh is a complex issue created by many mistakes. Some of these mistakes are being rectified by the PML-MQM government in power.
The battles in the streets of Karachi are ethnic and religious in nature, all conflicts have that element, but the main cause of friction is Karachi and Urban Sindh is ECONOMIC. To brand the problems as ethnic is dismissing a phenomenon that has to do with the evolution of South Asian society.
Here is a more credible historian who paints us a realistic picture of the events of Pakistani freedom. The book is “HAD THERE BEEN NO JINNAH” (@1989 by Salahuddin Khan Printed by: PanGraphics (Pvt) Ltd. Islamabad.pages 14-15

In a letter to Jinnah, in January 1937, Nehru declared,

“In the final analysis, there are only two forces in India today- British Imperialism, and the Congress representing Indian Nationalism, the Muslim Leaguerepresents a group of Muslims, having no contact withthe Muslim masses.”

This statement was indeed a great victory for the League for Jinnah and for Liaqat Ali Khan. It defeated the Unionist-Congress alliance in the Punjab and the Badsha Khan-Congress alliance in Sarhad. Both alliances would have defeated Pakistan if allowed to flourish.

I quote from Reference which is very Anti-Liaqat, but this gives us a very deep insight into the politics of the time:

“Punjabi chauvinism and Liaqat Ali Khan’s favoritism was at each others throat. The fight was furious and Mr. Khan was not a gentleman either. Mr. Khan was desperate to build his political base in the newly formed state. He could go to any length to achieve his personal goals” .

Political History of Pakistan, Vol. 4, edited by Hasan Jafar Zaidi, Idara-Mutala-i-Tarikh. pp 185-187

Liqat Ali Khan was a philanthropist, who took keen interest in developing the Muslims of East Punjab the place of his birth. He supported many institutions in Karnal and assisted as many Muslims as he could. Details of his philanthropy are clearly listed in Professor Ziauddin’s book Liaqat Ali Khan: Builder of Pakistan. He chose the old Muslim Leaguers who had supported the Quaid and had fought for Pakistan. It did not matter where the supporters originated—–the test was loyalty to Pakistan.

Charging Liaqat Ali Khan with nepotism, and commenting on the appointments Liaqat Ali Khan had made, here is another quote from the Political History of Pakistan:

Hashim Raza, administrator Karachi; his brother Kazim Raza, IG police; Aal-e-Raza, also brother of Hashim, Public Prosecutor; Superintendent CID; Home Secretary Punjab, all of them from UP. Liaqat Ali Khan did all this to secure his political success from Karachi at least.

Here is Hasan Jafar Zaidi defending Liaqat Ali Khan:

It doesn’t mean that Punjab was being suppressed. The then chief secretary East Bengal, Aziz Ahmad was from Punjab. The commander of army in Bengal was (you guessed it right) Maj. General Ayub Khan was from Hazar…. They never gave the respect to political leadership of Bengal either.

This incorrect sentiment against Liaqat Ali Khan (planted by the antagonist of the Muslim League, the great feudal Mr. Khizar Hyatt and the pro-Congress, and anti-Pakistan, Unionist Party ) has been uprooted in our historical records and died in the feudal stronghold of Rawalpindi and the Potowar region (the Hyatt-Tiwans stronghold). After the creation of Pakistan the pro-Congress/Gandhi Unionist Party of Punjab went extinct but the remnants of the old political guard still oppose the Muslim League or what it stood for. Shaheed-e-Millats anniversary cannot be ignored. It is the anniversary of the victory for Pakistan. Liaqat Ali Khan has been given his rightful place in history. The ablest lieutenants of the Quaid has his place next to the the Quaid. The nation calls him shahed-e-millat. Pakistani patriots call him shaheed-e-millat. If Quaid-e- Azam was the founder of nation, Quaid-e-Millat, Liaqat Ali Khan was the builder of the state.

Preservation of our history is our sacred duty. This site would be a very boring place without the interactive dialogue and the criticism of our leadership. Criticism of our leaders is an essential part of the dialogue. More criticism of the Khan and of the Muslim League will be rebutted in the columns.